Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses Fall 12-20-2017 Responsible Pet Ownership: Dog Parks and Demographic Change in Portland, Oregon Matthew Harris Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Urban Studies Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Harris, Matthew, "Responsible Pet Ownership: Dog Parks and Demographic Change in Portland, Oregon" (2017). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4151. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.6039 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Responsible Pet Ownership: Dog Parks and Demographic Change in Portland, Oregon by Matthew Harris A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Urban Studies in Urban Studies Thesis Committee: Marisa Zapata, Chair Lisa Bates Matthew Gebhardt Portland State University 2017 ABSTRACT Dog parks are the fastest growing type of park in U.S. cities; however, their increasing popularity has been met with increasing criticism of pets in public space. Dogs have shown to be a deep source of neighborhood conflict, and the provision of dog parks, or off-leash areas, is a seemingly intractable controversy for city officials. In 2003, Portland, Oregon established a network of 33 off-leash areas which remains the second largest both in count and per capita in the country. The purpose of my research is to understand the public debate over off leash dogs during the establishment of Portland’s off-leash area network, and how dog parks relate to processes of demographic change. The analysis involved two phases. First, I conducted a thematic analysis of editorial perspectives published in the major local newspaper. Second, I conducted an exploratory spatial analysis of the distribution of Portland’s off-leash areas and patterns of racial and economic change throughout the city from 2000 to 2015. Central to the debate are conflicting notions of responsible pet ownership. The notions of responsibility employed in the debate are primarily personal, yet the findings from my exploratory analysis of the relationship between dog parks and demographic change suggest a need to attend to notions of public responsibility. I am not arguing that dog parks explain demographic change; however, I am advocating that future research, discussion, representations, and policy regarding dog parks consider the consequences of off-leash areas as amenities within the changing neighborhoods in which they exist. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank a few of the people who helped make this work possible. First, I must thank my wife Julie for all of her patience, support, and inspiration, and our daughter Rita for motivating me to keep on track. Dr. Zapata, my committee chair, for all the opportunities, experience, and conversations she offered. My thesis writing group for our weekly support and discussions: Amy Marion, Aaron Johnson, Austin Cummings, Nick Chun, and Justin Ward. Dr. Adiv who helped shaped this project at its earliest stage, as well as Dr. Bates and Dr. Gebhardt, my other committee members, for their time and thoughtful feedback. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ iv LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 2: DOG PARKS AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE .......................................... 5 Dog Parks and Off-Leash Areas ................................................................................................... 6 Neighborhood Change ................................................................................................................. 14 Dog Parks and Neighborhood Change ....................................................................................... 17 CHAPTER 3: DOG PARKS IN PORTLAND .......................................................................... 25 Portland’s Off-Leash Area Program.......................................................................................... 26 Portland’s Neighborhoods and Off-Leash Areas ...................................................................... 31 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 39 CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS ........................................................................................................... 48 The Off-Leash Area Debate ........................................................................................................ 48 Dog Parks and Neighborhood Change ....................................................................................... 64 CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................... 73 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 84 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 87 APPENDIX A: EDITORIAL ANALYSIS DATASET ............................................................. 92 APPENDIX B: EDITORIAL ANALYSIS CODE LIST AND DESCRIPTIONS ................ 111 APPENDIX C: PORTLAND NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE METHODOLOGY ............. 113 APPENDIX D: OFF-LEASH AREA RACE AND INCOME CENSUS DATA ................... 116 iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Average proportions of white population and median household income change for categories of demographic change for block groups containing off-leash areas (2000-2015)....................................................................................................................... 67 iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Block Group Demographic Change in Portland, Oregon (2000-2015)............. 33 Figure 2: Off-Leash Areas and Block Group Demographic Change in Portland, Oregon (2000-2015)....................................................................................................................... 66 Figure 3: Complaints of Off Leash Dogs and Block Group Demographic Change in Portland, Oregon (2000-2015) .......................................................................................... 70 v CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Dog parks are the fastest growing type of park in U.S. cities (Trust for Public Land 2015); however, their increasing popularity has been met with increasing criticism of pets in public space. Dogs have shown to be a deep source of neighborhood conflict (Tissot 2011; Drew 2011), and the provision of dog parks, or off-leash areas, is a seemingly intractable controversy for city officials (Thompson 2001). While dog parks are certainly beneficial, the benefits are not experienced universally; they are amenities for some and a disturbance or threat to others (Urbanik and Morgan 2013). Given these contentions, and the close relationship between humans and their companion animals, the literature on dog parks is surprisingly scant. I identify the majority of literature on dog parks as dog-centric because it privileges dogs, dog owners, and dog parks in the assumptions and framings of the politics and uses of off-leash areas. Research in the disciplines of landscape design, public health, and human-animal studies seeks to improve the user benefits of dog parks (Lee et al. 2009), and tends to conceive of conflicting uses and claims to public space as obstacles to the unquestioned benefit and public good of off-leash areas (Wolch and Rowe 1992; Walsh 2011). Dog-centric literature situates the history of dog parks within an uncomplicated narrative of morally just off-leash activism (Krohe 2005), and investigates a politics of place narrowly focused on whether or not dogs belong in particular public spaces (Instone and Mee 2011). In contrast to the dog-centric perspective, recent urban studies research explores the relationship between dog parks and broader urban social processes. This perspective 1 critiques the racial and economic privilege of dog owners and the forms and tactics of off-leash advocacy and activism (Nast 2006a; Holmberg 2013), it examines how racialized urban space informs the location of dog parks (Nast 2006a), and it investigates a politics of place beyond the off-leash area to address demographic change, social exclusion, and political displacement (Tissot 2011; Hyra 2015). Dog parks are not an inherent feature of the urban landscape; they emerged throughout the 1990s and 2000s as a spatial accommodation to assuage community complaints of off leash dogs in cities. Dog parks are an urban phenomenon, but the majority of the research and public debate around their production and maintenance focus narrowly on the physical space of the off-leash area at the expense of adequately